Re: [Dev-C++] templates in C++ : precisions

[erwan a. <erw...@fr...>]

???
You're right. The change from class to typename made my code compile, =
but I continued with coding, and now, when I change my code from =
typename to class, it does compile... I do not know what makes it =
compile now...
Anyway, I will stay with the class keyword. I found it more beautiful :)

nb: there is no B(), this was just a simple sample to illustrate my =
problem... I thought ....

  ----- Original Message -----=20
  From: Ioannis Vranos=20
  To: Dev-C++ Mailing List=20
  Sent: Sunday, January 12, 2003 5:05 PM
  Subject: Re: [Dev-C++] templates in C++ : precisions


        This is non-sense (at least). Did you correct B() as i =
suggested?


        Ioannis Vranos

        * Programming pages: http://www.noicys.freeurl.com
        * Alternative URL: http://run.to/noicys=20

        -------Original Message-------

        From: erwan ancel
        Date: =CA=F5=F1=E9=E1=EA=DE, 12 =C9=E1=ED=EF=F5=DC=F1=E9=EF=F2 =
2003 5:04:32 =EC=EC
        To: Dev-C++ Mailing List
        Subject: Re: [Dev-C++] templates in C++ : precisions

        >>The typename has exactly the same effect. They are both =
equivalents for the definition of template arguments.

        With gcc, they don't. I did some testing: typename compiles, and =
class doesn't. Perhaps gcc tries to compile something more when it knows =
the template parameter is a class...




      =20
              =20
      =20